Ian Haywood wrote: > > Tim Churches wrote: >>> So, IMHO a "small target" is in order, not the best, just usable, >>> focussing >>> on the bread-and-butter stuff that Jon et al. isn't interested in. >>> > To Jon: sorry, by 'interested' I meant the fact > that academic funding sources are scare for writing, > say, an MDW2 clone, not that, you, personally, > may or may not be interested in basic EHR functions. >> Perhaps, although I think that Jon and his colleagues might also >> interested in issues of how such systems should be engineered, and such >> considerations necessarily involve the bread-and-butter, >> meat-and-potatoes aspects of the system as well as the fancier "add-ons" >> or "plug-ins" which you mention. For example, hand-crafted data entry >> screens/pages are probably not the ideal in terms of maintainability and >> dynamic system re-configuration to meet changing or multiple needs, but >> all of the automatically generated data entry screens I've ever seen >> leave a lot to be desired. Closing that gap is an area of applied >> research in which academic participants or partners might be quite >> interested, and it is an area in which a funded person-year of work by >> the right team of people can make a real difference >> > Indeed, and this is what (AFAIK) the OpenEHR people > are working on.
Yes, although if what they were showing off at the Health Informatics Conference in Sydney last month is any guide, they have a long way to go when it comes to automatically generating information systems with decent user interfaces from archetype definitions. > You are quite right, a revolutionary new perfect > EHR with the ability to specify data and interfaces at entirely > new levels of abstraction, is something researchers can and should > be interested in, and something basement hackers aren't going to achieve. > I fully support any such effort and would help out any way I can, > but I honestly wouldn't know where to start with this (but I suspect > you know more than I) > > However this gets to the heart of the Linux/HURD > dialectic. Linux is not a research kernel, it's initial design was very > orthodox, even archaic. This is what Horst and I want: a nice boring plain > old EHR, > so we can burn our Windows EULAs, that's the real goal here, to be honest. Yup, OK. Good luck with RoR, I'm genuinely interested in seeing what you can come up using it. Tim C _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
